January 19, 2013

Posted by orrinj at 5:48 AM

OUR REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT:

Obama Doctrine, Reagan Doctrine (James Joyner, January 18, 2013, CS Monitor)

A few months later, Charles Krauthammer dubbed this "overt and unashamed American support for anti-Communist revolution" the Reagan Doctrine in a Time magazine essay. Its essence was use of proxies rather than direct American intervention. If a legitimate popular uprising was taking place against a communist regime in the developing world, Reagan reasoned that it was both morally right and in America's interests to help it with arms and material support.

President Obama has quietly adopted a similar strategy, one using NATO allies, France in particular, as a proxy. First, we had the March 2011 intervention in Libya, in which American forces played a heavy role in the initial strikes, providing our "unique capabilities," but then quickly transitioned to a supporting role, providing suppression of enemy air defense; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; and air-to-air refueling assets to enable the mission. We appear to be on a similar path in Mali, quietly providing combat enablers in a mission with France in the driver's seat.

Posted by orrinj at 5:23 AM

A STORY TO TELL (AND SELL):

If a 200-year-old flour company can nail social media, why can't your brand? (Trevor Young, 1/18/13, Leading Company)

What is King Arthur Flour doing that's so progressive? First of all, the brand focuses on producing interesting and relevant content.

It doesn't flog us about the ears just talking about its flour and why it's so great, but rather it takes a more considered and bigger-picture view. Its content strategy is to educate the public on cooking with flour, celebrate the art of baking (also known as 'food porn') and generally build and cultivate community of people who are interested in baking.

Furthermore - and importantly - King Arthur Flour markets its brand by telling interesting and informative stories across multiple mediums, especially video.

In keeping with its goal of educating amateur, professional and aspiring bakers, King Arthur Flour runs a baking education centre, a schools-based 'Life Skills Bread Baking Program' and a series of travelling, free baking demos.

Let's shift our attention to King Arthur's social media channels, an area where it is excelling.

Posted by orrinj at 5:05 AM

FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE KNITTERS...:

Rage Against the Machine : 200 years ago, the Luddites tried to stop technological progress. They didn't succeed. (Morgan Meis

Can technological progress be stopped? That is the question the Luddites asked 200 years ago in England. They did more than just ask the question -- they tried to stop technological progress, physically. The Luddites were not particularly sophisticated in their methodology. Their main idea was to smash things. Their favorite things to smash were stocking frames. Stocking frames are machines used to knit. The first stocking frames were invented in the late 16th century. But stocking frames really came into their own at the beginning of the 19th century, with automation. That's when the industrial revolution was swinging into high gear. The new machines being built in northern England in the early 19th century were transforming the textile industry from one that required highly skilled labor into an industry that required almost no skill at all. A person could be trained to operate a stocking frame in a few hours. Knitting -- once a well-paid occupation -- was fast becoming a low-wage affair.

According to legend, a young kid named Ned Ludd had smashed up a couple of stocking frames some time in the late 18th century. The Luddites of the early 19th century took up Ludd's name and cause. They began smashing up factories and, occasionally, killing people. They also wrote letters to politicians and factory owners threatening they would kill them or otherwise make serious trouble. A typical Luddite letter, this one to Henry of Leicester, reads as follows:

It having been presented to me that you are one of those damned miscreants who deligh [sic] in distressing and bringing to poverty those poore unhappy and much injured men called Stocking makers; now be it known unto you that I have this day issued orders for your being shot through the body with a Leden Ball...
(From Writings of the Luddites, edited by Kevin Binfield)

By 1813, the Luddite rebellion had become serious enough to bring out the army. With this development, the Luddite rebellion could not last very long. Luddite leaders were rounded up and well-publicized trials conducted. Some called them show trials. The army and the authorities restored order. By 1816, there was no longer a Luddite movement to speak of.

But the legend lived on. Something about the Luddites had captured the popular imagination. The attention wasn't always positive. Calling someone a Luddite became synonymous with calling him or her a reactionary. The ineffectiveness of the Luddite rebellion probably helped in this assessment. How was smashing up stocking frames going to defeat the greater social and historical forces that had led to automated stocking frames in the first place? The Luddites, so the thinking goes, were out of their league. The development of 19th century industrial capitalism was not going to grind to a halt because of few guys in Leicester had wrecked a couple of machines. Luddism, then, is a movement of futility. The Luddites were buffoons who mistook machines for enemies and tried to halt historical processes that were unstoppable.

It was all good clean fun when technology and trade were just making the labor of blue collar workers obsolete, but now that it's hitting the white collar crowd it's suddenly a crisis. 

But the fact is that our advances in efficiency and productivity make our economy produce more wealth even as we are required to put in less labor.  We just face a question of how to distribute that wealth reasonably fairly in the absence of the redistributory mechanism we're replacing: the job.